|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 03 2013 @ 02:21 PM EDT |
...Apple's patents are worthless, thus mooting the Seventh
Amendment issue by failing the "twenty dollar" threshold.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 03 2013 @ 02:56 PM EDT |
I don't get it... Samsung doesn't want a retrial for damage?
why is it arguing about the Seventh Amendment?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: JonCB on Wednesday, April 03 2013 @ 03:12 PM EDT |
When i read this Seventh Amendment thing i didn't see much
of an angle. And then i reread the relevent brief...
Samsung has argued that there is case history that says you
can't try only damages, infringement and damages is too
interwoven together and the previous jury form didn't give
enough information to show enough of the Jury's intent.
Thus if you throw together a quick damages trial you violate
Samsung's 7th amendment right to a jury trial.
Thus the new trial is going to be another long drawn out
affair.
Thus it's better to let the appeals play out to make sure
this new trial doesn't repeat old mistakes.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 03 2013 @ 03:22 PM EDT |
"...where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty
dollars..."
For all the wisdom accorded the Founding Fathers and Constitution writers I've
never figured out why they put a dollar value there. Was inflation unheard of at
that time? Admittedly, finding an alternative isn't easy. Perhaps the cost of a
horse & buggy, but who buys those now. Perhaps something like "median
monthly wage", but gathering those statistics would have been tricky in
their time. Maybe the approximate cost of basic food for a time period? Any
ideas for how we should amend the amendment?
SB[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
